Hicks had his grievances with how events in Benghazi were handled, but his gripes were about bureaucratic squabbles rather than political scandal. And this whistleblower spent a good bit of time tooting his own horn. "I earned a reputation for being an innovative policymaker who got the job done. I was promoted quickly and received numerous awards," Hicks informed the lawmakers. "I have two master's degrees. ... I speak fluent Arabic. ... I fast became known as the ambassador's bulldog because of my decisive management styles. ... Incoming charge Larry Pope told me personally that my performance was near-heroic."

So basically this guy just wanted a huge stage to let everyone know he had to be at the gym in 27 minutes.

Doc Lee: This just shows the ignorance and stupidity of the common Fox News-watching Republican apologist. They still think this entire thing is over whether it was about a video or not. That ship sailed a long time ago. In the end, it doesn't matter what the cause was. Is that what you ignorant Republicans think? That you're going to impeach a President because somebody claimed an attack was over a video? shiat, your messiah Bush sat there for years and said that those who attacked us on 9/11 hated us for our freedoms and you ignorant twits sat there nodding your heads. Anybody knowledgeable about politics would tell you that's a flat out lie and not the cause of the 9/11 attacks or any of the numerous consulate attacks under the previous administration...you know...the ones you didn't care jack shiat about. Not even Republicans today are pushing the video angle except in some interviews on your news source of choice. And that's largely why you Republican idiots repeat it even though that ship has sailed. If you want to be up to date on your poutrage, this is now a hearing about responses, not causes. Republicans, being the party that politicizes everything, are now trying to find some way to claim that the Americans could have been saved if there was a faster response, even though officials that testified earlier had stated there was no way that there could have been an adequate military response in time and that it could have lead to more deaths. But, that's not going to stop the Republican politicizers from trying. They'll keep bringing in people to the hearings until they find somebody that says exactly what they want to hear and prevent people from testifying that are going to tell them non-fiction. I wouldn't be surprised if we see some low information, low IQ (i.e. average Republican) Fox Newser giving testimony one day saying, "They said it was about a video and it wasn't! Impeach!" and the Republicanists on the committee would get up there in front of the cameras for you little sheep and say, "The testimony we heard today was just damning to the President." You'd sit there with a shiat eating grin on your face nodding your head in agreement like the little Republican biatch that you are.

Get off my lawn and go fark yourself.

Just wanted to say "this" and see if I could include your full paragraph.

badhatharry:Covering up a terrorist attack is a scandal. Falsely blaming an American and putting a target on his back for the rest of his life is a scandal. Threatening witnesses is a scandal. Lying to the American people is a scandal. Lying under oath is a crime.

Covering up a terrorist attack is a scandal. Falsely blaming an American and putting a target on his back for the rest of his life is a scandal. Threatening witnesses is a scandal. Lying to the American people is a scandal. Lying under oath is a crime.

rnld:o5iiawah: The hearings which are taking place now is the first we've heard from the "Whistleblowers" and we still dont have a credible answer as to why the official position of the administration in the 2 weeks after the attack was that it was related to the YT video.

First, due to confusion and lack of information, the cause of the riots is thought to be a Muslim-bashing film on YouTube. Later it is found that the riots were caused in connection to 9/11's anniversary. Yet the GOP claims that Obama "lied" about the cause. He was misinformed at the start, yes, but so was everyone else. That sort of thing happens when a huge riot is going down and there are no reliable news sources around for miles to verify until after the fact. Unless Obama continued to place the blame on the YT video (which he didn't), then he would have been lying. Yet somehow, a majority of Republicans keep repeating the mantra of "OBAMA BLAMED IT ON THE TAPE" over and over again as if it somehow had anything to do with the death of 4 Americans.

So then the Republicans keep digging the hole deeper, and get into some stupid arguments over semantics. So he called it "an act of terror" instead of "terrorism"? SO F*CKING WHAT. "But..but..he didn't declare it terrorism the second it happened!" But...but...you're a dumb asshole. Considering no one really knew what was going on, calling it terrorism would have been premature. And seriously, what difference would have calling it terrorism right away have made? Would it magically have prevented the death of 4 Americans? I seriously doubt it.

Not content with proving how single-minded they are, the GOP continues to derp even harder, and bring out the arm-chair warriors. They kept hollering stupidity such as: "IF OBAMA HAD SENT THE ARMY, THE MARINES, THE NRA AND CAPTAIN PLANET, THEY WOULD HAVE STILL BEEN ALIVE AND MY WIFE WOULDN'T HAVE LEFT ME FOR A WOMAN". Because we all know the military will jump into a serious conflict immediately without any planning and advance intel, and Obama is a selfish bastard that wouldn't let them use his Magic Time Machine to prevent this from happening.

Having failed to make that stick, the Republicans really stepped their derp game up and decided to shift the blame to Hillary. You could see the GOP wetting their pants in glee when she took the stand, thinking they had her dead to rights. Those dumb b*tches forgot that Hillary has been playing the politics game when most of those f*ckers were still trolling public parks for gay sex in high school. They had nothing on her, and they knew it, yet they still wasted everybody's time anyway, which is par for the course for the GOP.

So with no recourse left, the Republi - trolls on here seek cold comfort in being willfully obstinate and parroting the inane "OBAMA LIED, SOLDIERS DIED!" slogan in hopes that would piss off "the libs". Sorry, but watching idiots continually regurgitate crap like a dog that eats its own poop only illicits some pity and a few chuckles from me, not anger.

Skanque:Oh.... hmmmm. So Stevens pretty much farked his own chicken? Interesting.

It's clear that Obama was provided with a mind-control device (or possibly a Staff of Domination) by either the Muslim Brotherhood or the Reverse Vampires which was then used to overcome the Ambassador's will and make him a suicidal puppet.

Skanque:jjorsett: Skanque: The only thing I can think is that security was inadequate at the consulate on that day, a fact that we can blame on republicans who cut the state department budget for embassy security.

And even assuming that to be true, what about the folks who went ahead and put people in there anyway knowing that the security was inadequate? Do they bear any responsibility, or is that reserved for people with (R) by their names?

This is the most rational argument made about anything scandal-worthy I've seen yet. Problem with this is that embassy security was cut across the board, so was there anything in particular about Benghazi that was especially dangerous? What about all the embassies in Muslim parts of the world? Did we need to abandon all our diplomatic missions because of these security issues? And don't diplomats and their staff assume a significant risk being in these places in the first place? For this to be scandalous there would have to be specific documents addressing a lack of security at the Benghazi installation in particular, and proof that said reports were ignored.

I keep seeing a lot of right-wing outrage in the comments on various websites about this whole Benghazi thing, but what the hell is the scandal? All their theories don't make any sense. Given the opportunity, we all know Dronebama would rain hellfire down on any brown people anywhere in that part of the world. No sitting president would tell a strike team or the like to stand down if there was something they could have done.

The only thing I can think is that security was inadequate at the consulate on that day, a fact that we can blame on republicans who cut the state department budget for embassy security.

This whole thing is unnecessarily retarded, and the more this drags on the angrier I get at these idiots who keep trying to make it a scandal.

/Not related, but if Issa ever asked me any questions, I would simply ignore him and say "I don't respond to someone with the morals of a car-thief".

Patrick Ventrell, the acting deputy press secretary at the State Department, said in an email that the failure of Hicks to find a satisfactory post was because he had cut short his Libyan assignment and that he was competing with colleagues of the same grade for future assignments. Ventrell said Hicks enjoyed the same pay and rank as before, and that a temporary post had been found for him pending possible reassignment elsewhere.

"The Department has not and will not retaliate against Mr. Hicks," said Patrick Ventrell, acting deputy spokesman for the State Department.

Hicks asked to be reassigned from Libya in the wake of the attack due to understandable family issues, said Mr. Ventrell. But that meant he was out of step with the annual assignment cycle. Finding a suitable post isn't always easy under such circumstances, he added.